(Mishnah): If Reuven said 'I impose an oath on you if you will not testify for me that Ploni owes me a deposit, a loan, stolen property and a lost object', and the witnesses said 'we swear that we do not know testimony for you', they are liable only one [Korban];

If they swore 'we do not know testimony that Ploni owes you a deposit, loan, stolen property or lost object', they are liable for each of these.

If he said 'I impose an oath on you if you will not testify for me that Ploni owes to me wheat, barley and spelt', and the witnesses said 'we swear that we do not know testimony for you', they are liable only once;

If they swore 'we do not know that Ploni owes you wheat, barley or spelt', they are liable for each one.

(Gemara) Question: What is the source that [Parshas Shevu'as ha'Edus] discusses only a claim of Mamon?

Answer (R. Elazar): It says here [two] "Oh"s, and it says below "Oh"s regarding Pikadon. Just like the "Oh"s regarding Pikadon discuss a claim of Mamon, also the "Oh"s here discuss a claim of Mamon.

Question: The "Oh"s written about a murderer are Yochi'ach (disprove this). They do not discuss a claim of Mamon!

Answer: We learn about "Oh"s that there is a Shevu'ah with them from"Oh"s that there is a Shevu'ah with them, and we do not disprove this from the "Oh"s written about a murderer, that there is no Shevu'ah with them.

Question: The "Oh"s written about a Sotah are Yochi'ach! There is a Shevu'ah with them, and they do not discuss a claim of Mamon!

Answer: We learn about "Oh"s that there is a Shevu'ah with them, and there is no Kohen [who imposes the Shevu'ah] with them from"Oh"s that there is a Shevu'ah with them and there is no Kohen with them, and we do not disprove this from the "Oh"s written about a Sotah, that there is a Kohen with them.

Question: The "Oh"s written about Bituy Sefasayim are Yochi'ach. They do not discuss a claim of Mamon!

Answer: We learn about "Oh"s in which the Torah made Mezid like Shogeg, from similar "Oh"s, and we do not disprove this from the "Oh"s written about Bituy Sefasayim, for which the Torah did not make Mezid like Shogeg.

R. Akiva says, "me'Eleh" - some of these are liable, and some of them are exempt. A matter of Mamon is liable, and what is not Mamon is exempt.

R. Shimon says, the Torah obligated [a Korban for a false Shevu'ah] here, and it obligated regarding a deposit. Just like a deposit discusses only a claim of Mamon, also here it discusses only a claim of Mamon.

(Mishnah): If he said "I impose a Shevu'ah on you if you will not come to and testify for me that Ploni owes me for damage, half-damage, Kefel (double payment of a thief), payment of four or five (for selling or slaughtering a stolen animal), or for raping or enticing my daughter, or that my son owes me for hitting me, or that Ploni wounded me or burned my stack on Yom Kipur" [and they knew testimony and accepted the Shevu'ah], they are liable.

(Gemara - Beraisa - R. Yosi ha'Gelili): Why does it say "v'Hu Ed Oh Ra'ah Oh Yada..."? It discusses only [monetary] testimony, which can be sustained through Yedi'ah without seeing, or seeing without Yedi'ah.

Question: What is the case of Yedi'ah without seeing in monetary testimony?

Answer: [Reuven told Shimon] "give to me 200 Zuz that you owe me." [Shimon replied] "I do not owe you." "Didn't you admit to me in front of Ploni and Almoni?" "If they will say so, I will give to you";

This is Yedi'ah without seeing. They come and say "yes, he admitted to him, but we do not know whether he stole from him. We do not know whether he lent to him."

Question: What is the case of seeing without Yedi'ah in monetary testimony?

Answer: [Reuven told Shimon] "give to me 200 Zuz that you owe me." [Shimon replied] "I do not owe you." "Didn't I count out [200 and give it] to you in front of Ploni and Almoni?" "If they will say so, I will give to you."

This is seeing without Yedi'ah. They come and say "yes, he counted out to him, but we do not know whether he [returned what he] stole from him. We do not know whether he lent to him."

[Another case of Yedi'ah without seeing - Reuven told Shimon] "give to me the fine [that you owe me] for my daughter (for rape, enticement or Motzi Shem Ra)." [Shimon replied] "I was never obligated a fine", and the witnesses testify that he was obligated a fine, but we do not know whether it was a fine for [Reuven']s daughter, or for another woman.

Note: One does not pay a fine through admission. Therefore, we discuss a claim that Beis Din already obligated him to pay a fine. Then it is considered Mamon, and if he admits that Beis Din obligated him, he must pay. In the next teaching, an admission of rape or enticement obligates! The claim must be for Boshes and Pegam, which accompany the fine; they are Mamon - PF.

[Reuven told Shimon] "you raped or enticed my daughter! [Pay to me Boshes and Pegam." Shimon replied] "I never raped or enticed a woman", and the witnesses testify that he raped or enticed a woman, but we do not know whether it was his daughter, or another woman.

[Reuven told Shimon] "you killed my ox or cut my young tree" [and brought witnesses who say so], and [Shimon] says "I do not know", he is liable;

If he says "you told me to kill or cut it", we follow the majority of young trees.

Question: What does it mean "we follow the majority of young trees"?

Answer (R. Chagai): If his ox was a gorer, [presumably] he told him [to kill it]. If his young trees were idle (not producing and prone to fall, presumably) he told him [to cut it].

(R. Yudan): We do not say about Mamon Migo, e.g. since I could say that I did not kill or cut it, believe me to say "you told me to kill or cut it.". We explained this like NO'AM YERUSHALMI.)

Note: No'am Yerushalmi says that the Yerushalmi holds that we never say Migo in monetary cases. The wording here and elsewhere connotes like this. However, below (7:1) he himself points out that R. Yochanan (who argues with R. Lazar, who applies Migo there) say Migo elsewhere in monetary matters (6:1)! It seems that we must explain "we do not say about Mamon Migo in a case like this", e.g. since it is brazen [to say that you told me to kill or cut it]."